Is anyone that cares going to put on a suit and talk to the people passing laws?
The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
231–240 of 796 posts
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#232> These NGOs have converged upon a unified strategy: use the rhetoric of ‘child safety’ to advocate for digital ID laws that would prevent adults from using the internet anonymously. Of course. Anyone who brings up kids is trying to manipulate you into giving up your freedom for security. Whatever argument they make should be simply ignored and dismissed.
Note how they always ignore parental controls, and skip straight to deanonymize everyone.
[dead]
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it’s normal to worry about your kids. It’s normal for family and friends to worry about your kids. When a politician is worried about your kids, you should be worried about your rights and freedoms. Not only for your own sake but for your kids too!
>When a politician is worried about your kids, you should be worried about your rights and freedoms. Not only for your own sake but for your kids too! What rights and freedoms should I worry about when a politician wants to make sure my child is fed by supporting food stamp programs or free hot lunches at school? The idea that any attempt to help a child is inherently suspect honestly says something distrubing about…
In the case of food stamps, that was the leverage by which social engineers destroyed the black family via incentives for single mothers — collapsing from 75% married (circa 1950s) to 25% married (modern).
The “Welfare State” is nothing but modern share cropping from the party of Jim Crow.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
> OK, but (as I have asked many times before) what is your alternative, beter proposal? How about laws that prevent social media websites from pushing harmful content users didn't ask for? How about forcing them to abandon the practices and dark patterns that result in those platforms being addictive? How about putting executives behind bars when their algorithms are shown to cause mental health and body image issues…
Well you're articulating the result you want, but not the mechanism for how you expect to achieve it. A law has to articulate which behaviors are legal or, and what the penalties for non-compliance are. Otherwise we could just pass laws saying 'the economy has to make everyone prosperous, people have to feel safe and fulfilled' and call it a day. So, what actual rules do you want to make in service of these desirable…
What I'd recommend is research on specific behaviors taken by social media companies to determine which are shown to cause harms. Some of that is already done by the companies themselves. If, for example, infinite scrolling is seen as a practice that increases addiction to the platforms, a law can be passed that makes it illegal to implement infinite scrolling. A law like that is pretty easy to explain and understand. TikTok was called out for sending push notifications to children's phones late at night to drive compulsive consumption and disrupt sleep patterns. Laws can be passed to limit how many unsolicited push notifications platforms can send and during which hours. Laws like that focus on the actual problems themselves, regardless of which platform is doing it, or who they are doing it to.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#235I'm always surprised how defensive people get in here about privacy when so many corporations have vastly more information about you than the government does.
Governments and Companies have different motivations.
Governments want control, Companies want money. Control typically comes from a reduction in rights, freedoms, money. When you fail to give those up "naturally" violence, worsened living conditions and abuse are the tools used.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
My issue with the whole move out of country X is that, where would you move to? It seems like everyone is moving in lock-step globally.
War is coming to Europe. At this point I'm even thinking about moving to China - at least they don't accept Zuckerberg checks. Tbf in my case I'm also a tech holder - so i'm just getting robbed.
I lived in China for a while a decade ago, studied at Tsinghua and did some research as well.
IMHO you have more freedom in China than in Europe. Can you walk on the street and say "Fuck Xi Jinping" like you would in France with Macron? Probably not. But it's a completely useless freedom to have.
At least in China you get relative safety when you walk on the street at night. And when the government decides to restrict some liberties you don't have to pay tens of thousands of politicians and lobbyist to do it.
If you have to choose your poison pill, you might as well pick the cheap one that does bring a semblance of harmony and not complete polarization and chaos.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I know a lot of tech people like to assume that government wants to control everything and these parents are fake front groups established to manufacture consent, but this is infowars-type conspiracy thinking You may not be aware of this, but Meta has been actively spending millions of dollars to redirect the rage against their algorithms and addictive harms, especially against children, and one of their strategies…
I'm very aware of that. As I said in another comment, 'ID checks to exclude minors' is a simple and intuitive idea that's very easy to sell; qualities that are singularly lacking in alternative proposals. How should online services be regulated to mitigate algorithmic harms? To get something over the line politically, it needs to be simple enough that it can be articulated in a few sentences.
> How should online services be regulated to mitigate algorithmic harms?
That would be a good conversation to have!
Instead what is happening is moneyed interests are inputting hundreds of millions of dollars into organizations that otherwise wouldn't have it, which is giving an "unnatural" amount of political influence to those groups, which is changing our country, and not just on this issue. They're literally doing it just to keep their money, and ID checks let them keep it without actually reducing the harms.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#238> These NGOs have converged upon a unified strategy: use the rhetoric of ‘child safety’ to advocate for digital ID laws that would prevent adults from using the internet anonymously. Of course. Anyone who brings up kids is trying to manipulate you into giving up your freedom for security. Whatever argument they make should be simply ignored and dismissed.
“Anyone who brings up kids is trying to manipulate you” Any argument with such blatant oversimplifications is almost certainly lacking in nuance and can be ignored and dismissed. I get what you’re pointing at: politicians regularly abuse these arguments, but that doesn’t mean it’s 100% of all arguments involving children.
Go ahead. Play their game. Be nuanced. Argue in good faith.
Then watch as they accuse you of supporting pedophilia.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#239All this talk starts from the assumption that anonymity is something to which anyone in a society should have a right.
Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
#240> These NGOs have converged upon a unified strategy: use the rhetoric of ‘child safety’ to advocate for digital ID laws that would prevent adults from using the internet anonymously. Of course. Anyone who brings up kids is trying to manipulate you into giving up your freedom for security. Whatever argument they make should be simply ignored and dismissed.
There's an ongoing debate in Australia to ban gambling advertisements. One of the arguments that is supportive of a ban says that children shouldn't be exposed to gambling advertisements during sports broadcasts, as they should be family friendly. Should that argument be ignored too?
[deleted]